We performed a comparison between Code42 Incydr and Digital Guardian based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of Fortinet FortiEDR was straightforward."
"The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"It notifies us if there's any suspicious file on any PC. If any execution or similar kind of thing is happening, it just alerts us. It doesn't only alert. It also blocks the execution until we allow it. We check whether the execution is legitimate or not, and then approve it or keep it blocked. This gives us a little bit of control over this mechanism. Fortinet FortiEDR is also very straightforward and easy to maintain."
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"Impressive detection capabilities"
"It is stable and scalable."
"Code42 Next-Gen DLP is scalable."
"It has quite a bit of flexibility in configuring backup sets."
"Risk factors can be adjusted for all intricate details."
"It had the ability to preseed by sending in a data drive and could restore by sending the user a data drive."
"t has a very user friendly status bar with common errors and has logs built in to the console so we can review the issues or status of CrashPlan."
"There are a couple of things. One of them is that they have what they call Incydr. Their detection and response solution to the insider threat area is called Incydr. That gives visibility to the clients that have widely dispersed employee bases due to work from home, or that had a dispersed workforce predating any of the work from home requirements. Even though they might not be inside the organization physically, they're inside the organization. It allows us to get some visibility into what people are doing, what the context is, and how to control what might be the potential for intellectual property theft or file exposure."
"Low system overhead, setting retention policies, ease of use"
"Works in the background and users are able to perform restores."
"The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"It has been scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Digital Guardian is its reputation. They have scored high on the Gartner Magic Quadrant."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"We have been able to monitor access to files from each of our workstations."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The EDR console should have more extensive reporting. You shouldn't need to purchase FortiAnalyzer. It should be included in the EDR part. The security adviser cloud platform could be improved with more options for exclusive or intensive rules for devices."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"Integration with Azure and SaaS provisioning tools could improve Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The support needs improvement."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"There doesn't seem to be any feature that is lacking."
"The application, written in Java, required far more system resources on a Client than other solutions."
"In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue."
"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"What I think could be improved is how I get support."
"You can't always filter out data that you'd like to."
"Java, please get rid of Java."
"Due to recent changes that effectively abandoned an entire segment of their user base, I no longer trust nor can recommend Code42 products."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"Technical support could be better."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"It would be helpful if there was an on-premise version of the solution for companies that cannot use the cloud, such as government sectors."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"When considering potential areas for improvement, it may be beneficial for Digital Guardian to optimize its processes and reduce the computational demands on the system, particularly with regard to high CPU usage. Although Digital Guardian offers numerous benefits, it can consume a substantial amount of RAM and CPU power."
Code42 Incydr is ranked 15th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 78 reviews while Digital Guardian is ranked 10th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews. Code42 Incydr is rated 9.0, while Digital Guardian is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Code42 Incydr writes "Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". Code42 Incydr is most compared with Threat Detection, Investigation & Response (TDIR) Platform, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Morphisec, Qualys Multi-Vector EDR and Symantec Data Loss Prevention, whereas Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, CrowdStrike Falcon and SentinelOne Singularity Complete. See our Code42 Incydr vs. Digital Guardian report.
See our list of best Data Loss Prevention (DLP) vendors and best Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) vendors.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.